Video: Olbermann slams Obama for “failing” to answer question he was never asked

posted at 4:42 pm on April 28, 2007 by Ian

When Keith Olbermann is anchoring unscripted events like a Presidential debate, you are bound to find him screwing up at least once. Bob Cox found Olby making several mistakes and highlighted them at Olbermann Watch.

In this clip Olbermann attempts to slam Sen. Barack Obama (keep reading, it’s not how it sounds) for not answering a question about Guiliani’s comment regarding electing Republicans to prevent a terror attack, which Olby did a Special Comment Attack on last week. Campaign adviser David Axelrod informed Keith that Obama was NOT asked about that, but rather about another attack on American soil in general. Note that the clips has been…edited.

No one is perfect. Did you see Bill-Oh Friday on the Factor? Loofah boy screamed at a nice lady, Jane Hall, for not agreeing that Bill Moyer’s special on PBS, about the roll of media leading up to the Iraq war, was a hit piece on THE MAN, Bill-Oh himself. Well, first Bill was a brief and minor part of a 90 minute show, but he thought it was all about him and how *BILL O’Reilly* was slandered. Bill-Oh showed a clip that was from the special and than the full clip. It was clear a small part was truncated at the start, and it was Bill-Ohs star evidence.

The clip showed him making a speech, threatening anyone who was NOT pro war and blaa blaa, they are un-american and he will expose them!!!! Well to be fair to BILL-Oh, he did say right before his rant and rave, one sentence, something like “we should not criticize people for free speech”. However he than criticized and threatened people who had free speech that was different than his opinion about the war. It was just typical Bill-Oh, Loofah boy.

Well this nice lady pointed out despite his claim we should not criticize people for freespeech, he did it anyway. BILL WENT insane. It was totally lost on him, he was being hypocritical in the same paragraph!

Also it was her opinion that Bill Moyer’s piece was overall was fair and did not specifically attack him. Her not agreeing and pointing out the full clips weakness and hypocrisy sent him into a rage.

What a paranoid self centered egotistical idiot. ITS ALL ABOUT BILL-OH TO BILL-OH (and his Loofah). He spends so much time complaining and attacking others that use his own words to embarrass and impeach him; he acts like a baby. If you are critical of him he will attack you and make up pure BS. HOWEVER its OK for him to do that and not others do it to him?

What a crazy fool, but that is why we love him. He is going to BLOW someday and I want to see it. Gun control? Bill-Oh is one that should not have a gun. WHAT HE DID TO Jane Hall, A SOFT SPOKEN LADY WHO HAD A POINT AND OPINION WAS UNACCEPTABLE TO ANY CIVIL PERSON. What is it about conservatives that makes them so unhinged and loony?

Jane Hall was obiviously not going to admit that Bill Moyer took clips of O’Reilly and flat out lied. I find it an insult as a Professor of Journalism that Jane Hall is, not to criticize a false and smear campaign by Bill Moyer. She found it “accurate”. She is flat out LYING and is a disgrace to every journalism school in the country.

Can’t believe I feel compelled to defend Bill O, but here goes. Bill O’s complaint is that Moyer’s documentary was dishonest. O’s compelling evidence was the deliberately misleading edits of O’s own words, where the context was changed to suit Moyer’s needs, and he demonstrated this by showing the clip from Moyer’s piece to the actual source material that the O man owned.

Bill O admitted he didn’t have access to the source material for everything else in Moyer’s hit piece, but just from this small sampling, it can be clearly seen that Moyer ws using creative editing to change the meaning, ever so slightly.

And Jane Hall would not admit that Moyers was lying, or that lying was bad, or that lying=lying, or whatever Jane’s point was.

As already pointed out, Bill is not a conservative. But my question to you is, are you taking blood pressure medication and if not, why. The second question is why do you watch someone who irritates you so?

I’m still annoyed at the outrage over Rudy saying something that he never said. It was just the latest bogus “scandal” created by the Democrats and media, only this time there wasn’t even something to spin from, it was a complete fabrication, Rudy didn’t say what they accused him of, and in fact he said something that Republicans have been saying for a long time, and what the Dems’ policies make clear, that the Democrats would take a defensive pre-9/11 tactic to deal with terrorism, rather than stay on the offense. Again, their policies prove this, but it was proven AGAIN by the fact that you could only get half of the Dems at the debate to acknowledge that there is a war on terror, and the ones that did acknowledge it are only pandering anyway because the recognize that they can’t win the popular vote if they don’t (Not sure what Edwards was thinking… in 2004 he wanted to be the pro-war candidate…. at least until he was picked up as Kerry’s VP because that’s what the polls told the Kerry camp would be the best choice)

Why are you always so out of control and off base? I’m not even going to get in to how badly you’re misrepresenting what Bill’s comments were (they were about people doing things to harm the country in a time of war, not simply opposing the war)… And he didn’t yell at and cut of Jane because she didn’t agree… He cut her off because he wanted a simple yes or no answer on something and she wanted to finish her talking points. This happens constantly with Democrats. They can’t debate an issue because it requires independent and on the spot thought. They come with a speech and just stick to the script.

I got an ideal why doesn’t KO just ask Guiliani about his comments..oh thats right KO doesn’t talk to people who disagree with him…honestly is there any other “reporters” out there that go out of their way to avoid interviewing people?..I mean how is he going to be able to avoid talking to any of the Republican candidates this and next year?..I know it’s going to be 2 and 1/2 years of watching him kiss Hillary’s ass but at some point even MSNBC is going to have to force him to at least look like he trying to be fair to both sides.

I know I’ve said this before on another blog, but I think it merits repeating:
Keith Olbermann fancies himself the reincarnation of Edward R. Murrow. If you ask me, he’s more like the reincarnation of William Hearst.

I’m still annoyed at the outrage over Rudy saying something that he never said. It was just the latest bogus “scandal” created by the Democrats and media, only this time there wasn’t even something to spin from, it was a complete fabrication, Rudy didn’t say what they accused him of, and in fact he said something that Republicans have been saying for a long time, and what the Dems’ policies make clear, that the Democrats would take a defensive pre-9/11 tactic to deal with terrorism, rather than stay on the offense. Again, their policies prove this, but it was proven AGAIN by the fact that you could only get half of the Dems at the debate to acknowledge that there is a war on terror, and the ones that did acknowledge it are only pandering anyway because the recognize that they can’t win the popular vote if they don’t (Not sure what Edwards was thinking… in 2004 he wanted to be the pro-war candidate…. at least until he was picked up as Kerry’s VP because that’s what the polls told the Kerry camp would be the best choice)

RightWinged on April 28, 2007 at 8:14 PM

I don’t even understand why anybody would be upset if Rudy really had said that people will be safer from terror attacks by electing Republicans. That’s self-evident, when the choice is between them and what passes for the Democrat party these days. The only Democrat leaders with a shred of backbone, like Joe Lieberman, are vilified by their own party. Reid, Pelosi, and the rest of their America-hating ilk are more than happy to appease or submit to any threat, when they aren’t flat out running away from it. The Republicans deserve plenty of criticism on national security issues like the border, but a choice between them and gutless surrender monkeys is a no-brainer. The terrorists can certainly tell the difference, which is why they always root for the Democrats.

Anyone who can take a blog about the POS Olberdouche and try to turn it into a criticism about O’Reilly (and there are many things about O’Reilly that I disagree with) is an idiot. I also hope that jetpilot is just a metaphor and that there is no one actually flying with such an idiot as this pilot.

Personally I’m enjoying watching the DEMs attack their own, even if they have to misrepresent Rudy to do it. Yeah, there’s nothing safer than electing Barry O who wants to increase foreign aid pay the Jizya so the terrorists will let us live. And yeah again, don’t feed the trolls when they divert the pointy comments from one of their own screwing up royally to someone else.

The point of Bill’s complaint was that Moyers is completely untrustworthy as a reporter. Bill could only prove what was said about him because he had both sides of the story. How is anyone to know what is truth and fiction unless they have both sides? We trust reporters to TELL THE TRUTH and ANY break in that trust is unacceptable.

Bill’s complaint about Moyers lying is less about Bill, and more about establishing that he is untrustworthy, and by extension, we know who to believe. Hence, he is looking out for the folks.

Jane was being a partisan tool and Bill slammed her for it.

With all this O’Reilly Derangement Syndrome around here, I am totally shocked that I haven’t read anyone mention the total smack down Ann Coulter did on Bill Friday night. She was all over him like ugly on an ape!

Bill O’ very often attempts to hunt for the “middle ground” of issues, from which he then criticizes those both left and right of him. However, he was perfectly in the right defending himself against Bill Moyers’ fabrications and distortions of his own words. Jane wouldn’t stop trying to answer simple questions with leftist agenda talking points. Bill wouldn’t allow that to continue.

Thanks for your interesting insights on the issue, as always. I honestly had not expected a troll from the fever swamp to defend Olbermann by claiming that O’Reilly is almost as bad. I don’t agree, but I must admit that you’re making progress, and the sessions seem to be helping you.

The gist of it was that Bill asked Ann if she would co-host any show as a counter to Rosie O Piggo. She took umbrage that Bill was suggesting the two were just opposite ends of the spectrum. (Which I don’t blame her because Rosie is an unhinged moonbat and Ann is a brilliant rational person) She refused to let him pigeon hole her and after he asked her one last time, she said that in order for there to be a counter to Rosie….

“that person would have to be on TV 5 days a week, spouting their personal agenda, be Irish, and have their last name start with “O”…….Right BILL?” (paraphrased)